Essay On Stop And Frisk
The Founding Fathers believed that the sanctity of individual rights must be held above all else, due to their prior experiences with the tyrannical rule of King George III of Great Britain. After the drafting and ratification of the Constitution, the United States government has introduced several laws and allowed several actions that compromise the liberties guaranteed by the Constitution in the supposed name of security or the general welfare. These laws include the Espionage Act which was introduced during World War I, and the use and allowance of ‘Stop and Frisk’ procedures amongst America’s various police agencies. The introduction and use of these laws and procedures were meant to keep the American public safe following outbreaks of war and to try and prevent weapon related violence, but they also compromise the liberties that are ensured to the
…show more content…
According to the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution: ““The right of the people to be secure in their persons... against unreasonable searches and seizures” (U.S. Const. Amend. IV). Stop and Frisk is a procedure used by several law enforcement agencies in which an officer stops and questions a pedestrian, then proceeds to frisk them for weapons and other contraband. Martin McFadden, an officer for the Cleveland Police Department, saw two men, John W. Terry and Richard Chilton, walking back and forth between two corners of the sidewalk. After meeting up with a third suspect, Katz, the officer proceeded to frisk them, finding a total of two guns between the three men. Terry and Chilton were charged with carrying a concealed weapon and were sentenced to prison time. After the men brought their case to the Supreme Court, their arrest was deemed constitutional. According to the Supreme
According to the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution: ““The right of the people to be secure in their persons... against unreasonable searches and seizures” (U.S. Const. Amend. IV). Stop and Frisk is a procedure used by several law enforcement agencies in which an officer stops and questions a pedestrian, then proceeds to frisk them for weapons and other contraband. Martin McFadden, an officer for the Cleveland Police Department, saw two men, John W. Terry and Richard Chilton, walking back and forth between two corners of the sidewalk. After meeting up with a third suspect, Katz, the officer proceeded to frisk them, finding a total of two guns between the three men. Terry and Chilton were charged with carrying a concealed weapon and were sentenced to prison time. After the men brought their case to the Supreme Court, their arrest was deemed constitutional. According to the Supreme